I think we'll leave this there as I can see a recurring trend where you find it difficult to perhaps admit you might be wrong with stuff. That's the whole point in having conversations and debates with others, not just barking opinions at each other. There is no shame in holding your hands up and not realising something. None of us are perfect.
As you insist on twisting and extrapolating from my posts, could I not just say the same thing? This just ends up as pigeon chess
Unless you meant to type 'a formula 1 driver once came 3rd' then this seems to suggest you're miles out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superstars_(British_TV_programme) BTW I'm not suggesting that driving a F1 car is easy, or that it requires no strength, I never equated it directly with driving a rally car, or indeed any of the other false arguments put forward. My opinion is simply that one day there'll be a breakthrough female who gets the right deal at a young enough age, and that will be a watershed moment. Whether I'm right? well we'll just have to wait and see.
In an attempt to lighten this up a bit, something that's always confused me is the role of strength and fitness in hill climbing, on foot. If you have to climb a hill with a 300m height difference, is it better to have a long gradual climb over several km, or a quick but steep climb over a few hundred metres? Despite walking thousands of miles I've never been able to fully decide which is best. I get knackend using either option. Any views, apart from the superb one from the summit?
Agreed about the steps, I've been up them many times. My worst experience was a climb called Loft Beck in the Lake District, on the Coast to Coast Walk. It's almost vertical in places. At times when climbing it I thought my legs had been attacked with an enraged rampant chainsaw. On the other hand, long gradual climbs (examples: Great Shunner Fell, Skiddaw) can be demoralising as you encounter one false summit after another on a day long slog. When you get to the actual summit, you hardly care any more.
Worst one for me was one of the sections of the Great Wall. The steps were huge and climbing it near vertical at times so that was tiring in the heat.
Not according to that list of the British and European winners. And even if there was one winner, it’s hardly ‘consistently won by’ is it? And my last word on F1, David Coulthard has made a lot of noise in interviews stating categorically that the best drivers in the world are WRC drivers, and that Sebastian Loeb is the greatest driver of his generation. He’s not the only F1 driver to say so, but I don’t have the energy to find other quotes.
A propos of nothing but in it's hey-day there were 6 or 7 Superstars 'World Championships'. Schechter won once but the others were won by a footballer (Brian Budd three times) and two pole vaulters (Bob Seagren and Brian Hooper).
I find it depends how terrified I am - once I have done striding edge which is more or less level the steep climb at the end up to the summit just flies by on adrenaline. Also can anyone explain why its more tiring walking up a grassy bank -eg Scales fell on Blencathra than it is going up the ridge eg dodds fell ( or Halls fell - though see above for terrified etc )
Rally car is not more physically demanding than F1. If a woman comes along who can drive a F1 car as fast as the top men I would guess they would be given a drive as the sponsorship potential would be huge.
I’ll ignore the first bit of idiocy How does someone get good at driving an F1 car? The general route is they start in karting as kids, and are into open wheel cars by 16, they don’t appear in F3 cars at 20 fully formed, there’s been years of backing and sponsorship before they get to F1. So back to my point; one day a girl will get picked up early and it’ll open the floodgates. Seriously nothing that I’m saying is radical.
Apart from your statement that rally driving is more physically demanding than F1 (which you slyly dodged again), but you don't have the decency to admit that is nonsense because god forbid you might be wrong.
If I could just say something.... Its about time we stopped talking about sport or any other discipline /job as gender specific. Its utter crap. If an INDIVIDUAL is good at something then surely they should be considered for any position in any walk of life. I'm not trying to be clever, I just think its commonsense but because we are conditioned by history and culture to have men's and women's teams we dont even address that properly. Personally if BFC had some top women in the squad it wouldn't matter a jot to me. I can see why some people would question strength/balance/stamina etc in an assumption on gender sports but I think its misplaced as there are always exceptions. Trouble is we are stuck in our institutionalised attitudes to gender and for the foreseeable future we're stuck with them. Its not gender for me its individuality.
